IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
CRP.No. 11 of 2011()
1. POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.,
... Petitioner
2. THE SPECIAL REVENUE OFFICER
Vs
1. JAYAKUMAR, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :12/01/2011
O R D E R
K.T.SANKARAN, J.
------------------------------
C.R.P.No.11 OF 2011
------------------------------
th
Dated this the 12 day of January, 2011
ORDER
The respondent filed O.P.(Ele.) No.203 of 2005
on the file of the Court of the Additional District
Judge-II, Thiruvananthapuram under Sections 10 and
16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, Section 51 of
the Indian Electricity Act, 1951 and Section 42 of
the Indian Electricity Supply Act claiming
compensation.
2. For drawing a 220 K.V. double circuit
transmission line, trees were cut from the property
belonging to the respondent. Dissatisfied with the
compensation awarded, the respondent filed the
Original Petition before the court below. He
claimed that the compensation awarded for the trees
cut was low. He also claimed compensation for
diminution of land value.
C.R.P.No.11 OF 2011 2
3. Before the court below, the only oral
evidence available was that of the claimant as PW1.
Both sides produced documents.
4. The court below considered the rival
contentions of the parties and enhanced
compensation on account of the trees cut, following
the decisions of the Supreme Court in Airports
Authority of India v. Satyagopal Roy and others(AIR
2002 SC 1423), State of Haryana v. Gurcharan Singh
and another(AIR 1996 SC 106) and K.S.E.B v. Livisha
(2007(3) KLT 1 (SC)).
5. The court below fixed the compensation for
the trees cut applying the multiplier at 8. All the
relevant facts were considered by the court below
for the purpose of fixing the compensation to be
awarded on account of the trees cut.
6. As regards the claim for diminution of land
C.R.P.No.11 OF 2011 3
value, the court below followed the principles laid
down in K.S.E.B. V. Livisha (2007(3) KLT 1 (SC)).
The claimant contended that the land value of the
affected land would be 15,000/-. The court below
fixed the market value at Rs.5,000/- and
compensation on account of diminution of land value
was awarded at that rate. The total enhanced
compensation awarded was Rs.72,359.50.
I do not think that the court below has
committed any error or that it has fixed a higher
amount as compensation. I do not think that any
interference is called for.
According, the Civil Revision Petition is
dismissed.
K.T.SANKARAN,
JUDGE.
cms